Marblehead voters to have say in deficit debate

Tuesday

Sep 11, 2012 at 12:01 AMSep 11, 2012 at 11:15 AM

About one third of Massachusetts voters, including those in Marblehead, will have the opportunity to say whether they support a mix of tax increases for the highest earners and cuts in military spending as a means to shrink the federal deficit.

Andy Metzger

About one third of Massachusetts voters, including those in Marblehead, will have the opportunity to say whether they support a mix of tax increases for the highest earners and cuts in military spending as a means to shrink the federal deficit.

A coalition of peace activists and labor organizations has gathered enough signatures to put a question on local ballots asking voters whether they support proposals to both protect some areas of the federal budget while raising revenues and cutting costs in other areas.

The coalition claims more than 1 million people in Massachusetts will have the chance to vote on the non-binding question this November.

“The ‘Budget for All’ ballot question seeks to send a message to Washington,” the coalition wrote in a press release. “No cuts to Social Security, Medicare and other vital programs; Invest in useful jobs; End offshore tax havens and tax cuts on the highest incomes; Reduce the military budget and bring all troops home safely from Afghanistan NOW.”

Questions over how to bridge the government’s structural deficit are likely on the agenda for Congress to take up after the November elections, and U.S. Sen. John Kerry has previously expressed optimism that Democrats and Republicans would be able to reach a compromise.

“I think that when the election is over and we go back for the lame-duck session, I sense among Democrats and Republicans alike a readiness to do what is necessary to avoid the economic chaos that comes with uncertainty,” Kerry told reporters at an Aug. 3 press conference.

More than a year ago, Republicans in Congress and President Barack Obama came to loggerheads over whether to raise the country’s debt limit. The nation’s debt hit $16 trillion last week.

A so-called “super committee” was formed to reduce the country’s deficit by $1.2 trillion over a decade. The 12-member committee, which included Kerry, was unable to come to agreement, triggering a process known as “sequestration.”

The mix of revenue increases and defense cuts favored by the ballot question’s backers is at odds with the solutions proposed by others, including vice presidential candidate Paul Ryan, who is chairman of the House Budget Committee and offered words of optimism when the “super committee” was first formed.

“As things stand, the budget process is stacked in favor of those who want to chase ever-higher spending with ever-higher taxes. In addition to cutting spending by $6.2 trillion in The Path to Prosperity, the Budget Committee will take action to reform our broken budget process in order to bring spending, deficits and debt under control,” Ryan said in an August 2011 statement.

Sequestration, which will begin in January 2013 unless Congress acts to undo it, would shuttle money toward the deficit, with $55 billion coming from the defense budget and another $55 billion from other federal programs such as farm aid, according to an explanatory document created by a congressional committee.

“The threat of sequestration was supposed to be scary enough to sober up the ideologues and force a compromise and give Republicans a reason to break up with Grover Norquist and his pledge, which has made compromise impossible. I’m still hopeful that after the election, sequestration will be the sword of Damacles hanging over Congress to push both sides to finally choose a balanced solution based on a shared sacrifice,” said Kerry in a statement.

The high-profile work of the “super committee” last winter helped inspire a coalition of peace groups to try to steer the debt and deficit conversation toward reducing military spending, said Paul Shannon of American Friends Service Committee.

“The super committee really got this whole effort going,” said Shannon, though at the start the effort was focused on reducing military spending as a means to quickly end the war in Afghanistan.

Over time, the coalition reached out to community organizers and organized labor and broadened its request to include new revenue as well as the preservation of veterans’ benefits, Social Security and other assistance, and investments in “manufacturing, schools, housing, renewable energy, transportation and other public services.”

“We soon came to realize that the issue of war and military spending really can’t be separated off from other critical issues going on,” Shannon told the News Service.

He said some groups are planning to go door to door while the western Massachusetts contingent will hold informational meetings, and there might be demonstrations to rally for the question’s passage. The groups have not organized a political action committee, he said.

The non-binding question, which asks state legislators to pass a non-binding resolution, will be on the ballot in 91 cities and towns — including Boston and Cambridge but not Worcester or Springfield. Organizers have succeeded in putting a question about the controversial “Citizens United” ruling by the Supreme Court on the ballot in many of the same areas.

The question will be on ballots in the following North Shore communities: Amesbury, Essex, Georgetown, Gloucester, Groveland, Marblehead, Merrimac, Newbury, Newburyport, Rockport, Salisbury, Swampscott, West Newbury, and parts of Boxford, Haverhill, Lawrence and Lynn. It will also be on the ballot in Medford and Melrose and parts of Malden and Wakefield, among many other communities statewide.